The Most Catastrophic Climate Predictions Are Seen as the Most Probable

Small ice figures by Nele Azevedo on the stairs of Gendarmenmardt in Berlin September 2, 2009 to symbolize effects of global warming (AP Photo: Maya Hitij)

New scientific research shows that by the end of this century, the most catastrophic outcome of global warming is also the most likely to occur, making large areas of the planet virtually unbearable.

Researchers from Australia and France say the planet’s overall temperature will increase by 4 degrees Celsius (or 7.2 degrees Fahrenheit) by 2100 unless greenhouse gas emissions are reduced. That is double the level that world governments agree would be dangerous.

“4C would likely be catastrophic rather than simply dangerous,” the study’s lead researcher, Professor Steven Sherwood at the University of New South Wales in Australia, told The Guardian. “For example, it would make life difficult, if not impossible, in much of the tropics, and would guarantee the eventual melting of the Greenland ice sheet and some of the Antarctic ice sheet.”

The latter development would cause sea levels to rise by several meters, causing permanent flooding in low-lying areas along coastlines.

Sherwood said the research reveals how climate change is impacting clouds, and consequently, increasing the likelihood of higher air temperatures in the coming decades.

The warming of the planet results in fewer clouds, which in turn allows for less sunlight to be reflected by clouds back out toward space, causing temperatures to rise even more.

“This study breaks new ground twice: first by identifying what is controlling the cloud changes and second by strongly discounting the lowest estimates of future global warming in favor of the higher and more damaging estimates,” he said.

The conclusions derived by the study address several arguments made by climate change deniers. “Climate sceptics like to criticize climate models for getting things wrong, and we are the first to admit they are not perfect,” Sherwood told the newspaper. “But what we are finding is that the mistakes are being made by the models which predict less warming, not those that predict more.

“Sceptics may also point to the 'hiatus' of temperatures since the end of the 20th century,” he added, “but there is increasing evidence that this inaptly named hiatus is not seen in other measures of the climate system, and is almost certainly temporary.”

Comments

Kelfin Planck
2 years ago

Mark Goldes' "Aesop Institute" is simply an elaborate fraud. Mark Goldes, starting in the mid-seventies, engaged for several years in the pretense that his company SunWind Ltd was developing a nearly production-ready, road-worthy, wind-powered "windmobile,"
based on the windmobile invented by James Amick; and that therefore SunWind would be a wonderful investment opportunity. After SunWind "dried up" in 1983, Goldes embarked on the long-running pretense that his company Room Temperature Superconductors Inc was
developing room-temperature superconductors; and that therefore Room Temperature Superconductors Inc would be a wonderful investment opportunity. He continues the pretense that the company developed something useful, even to this day. And then Goldes embarked
on the pretense that his company Magnetic Power Inc was developing "NO FUEL ENGINES" based on "Virtual Photon Flux;" and then, on the pretense that MPI was developing horn-powered "NO FUEL ENGINES" based on the resonance of magnetized tuning-rods; and then,
on the pretense that his company Chava LLC (aka "Chava Energy") was developing water-fueled engines based on "collapsing hydrogen orbits" (which are ruled out by quantum physics); and then, on the pretense that he was developing strictly-ambient-heat-powered
"NO FUEL ENGINES" (which are ruled out by the Second Law of Thermodynamics). But of course, the laws of physics always make an exception for the make-believe pretenses of Mark Goldes. Goldes' forty-year career of "revolutionary breakthrough" pretense has nothing
to do with science, but only with pseudoscience, pseudophysics, and relentless flimflam, in pursuit of loans and donations from gullible people who never mastered physics very well. Mark Goldes' "Aesop Institute" has engaged for many years in the very dishonest
and unscrupulous practice of soliciting loans and donations under an endless series of false pretenses, that it is developing and even "prototyping" various "revolutionary breakthroughs," such as "NO FUEL ENGINES" that run on ambient heat alone - or run on
"Virtual Photon Flux" - or on "Collapsing Hydrogen Orbits" - or even on the acoustic energy of sound from a horn. Aesop Institute's make-believe strictly ambient heat engine is ruled out by the Second Law of Thermodynamics. This has been understood by physicists
for at least 180 years. There is no "new science" that has ever determined such an engine to be possible. Aesop Institute's make-believe "Virtual Photon Flux" engine is based on the idea that accessible electric power "is everywhere present in unlimited quantities"
- which we know to be false. Aesop Institute's make-believe "Collapsing Hydrogen Orbits" engine is based on Randell Mills' theory of "hydrino" hydrogen, which every scientist knows to be false. Aesop Institute's make-believe horn-powered engine is based on
the pretense that a magnetized tuning rod could somehow "multiply energy" - a ludicrous notion, which is obviously ruled out by the law of conservation of energy. Aesop Institute's very latest make-believe engine is a perpetual motion machine in the form of
a self-powered air compressor, which proposes to use a turbine to compress air to spin the turbine to compress air to spin the turbine. Aesop Institute has never offered the slightest shadow of evidence that it is actually developing or "prototyping" any of
these make-believe physics-defying "revolutionary breakthroughs." All it has ever offered are mere declarations that it is doing so - unsupported by any proof whatever, of any kind whatever. There are no "revolutionary breakthroughs" to be found on Goldes'
fraudulent "Aesop Institute" website. There is only pseudoscience, relentless flimflam, and empty claims of engines that are ruled out by the laws of physics. http://physicsreviewboard.wordpress.com/2013/12/22/perpetual-flimflam-machine-mark-goldes-fraudulent-aesop-institute/

jamie
2 years ago

Lol what a joke. Global warming?!?! Tell it to the crew trying to prove global warming in Antarctica, lol. While their ship is stuck in ice!!!!

MarkGoldes
2 years ago

A positive alternative is being born. It could open doors to potentially slowing and perhaps reversing Global Warming. “The thermal energy content of the atmosphere, ocean, and upper crust is estimated to be more than 10,000 times that of the world's fossil
fuel reserves, making it a potentially inexhaustible reservoir of green energy.” Daniel P. Sheehan University of San Diego Sheehan has long believed this energy can be tapped to produce power. AESOP Institute is prototyping THE LITTLE ENGINE THAT COOLS. This
engine will run on the thermal energy content of the atmosphere, a form of solar energy. See www.aesopinstitute.org to learn more about this hard to believe NO FUEL PISTON ENGINE. It will exhaust cold air. Think of it as a refrigerator that generates electricity.
A 24/7 inexpensive power producing alternative to radioactive and fossil fuels. The possibility of such an engine is viciously disputed by a few scientists who seem to fear experiments that would prove practical engines running on atmospheric heat are possible.
Once validated by independent labs, the prototype will provide an exciting path to other examples of new science that could slow, and perhaps point to paths to reverse, Global Warming.

Ruth Lipscome
2 years ago

Why aren't we talking about the role played by overpopulation in these catastrophic predictions?

b wallis
2 years ago

global warming theory is based on a false premise,and furthermore I can prove it 100%.The theory explaining the ice-age is wrong and this lays a false path to explaining climate change hiatus.If anyone requires a copy explaining where scientists are wrong,please
ask.Yes,by truly understanding the reason for the ice-age climate change is readily understood.